"我该怎样待这百姓呢?"犹太医学资源配置思想中的生物伦理困境:对立观点的共存。

IF 0.1 Q4 LAW
MEDICINE AND LAW Pub Date : 2015-09-01
Annie Reiss, Yigal Shafran, Esther-Lee Marcus
{"title":"\"我该怎样待这百姓呢?\"犹太医学资源配置思想中的生物伦理困境:对立观点的共存。","authors":"Annie Reiss,&nbsp;Yigal Shafran,&nbsp;Esther-Lee Marcus","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Life and death decisions have always been part of the medical profession. Modem discussions on resource allocation in health care deal with such critical situations, and seek ethical solutions that will benefit individuals and society as well as conserve scarce resources. Deontological ethics and utilitarianism are opposing ethical views, each with its own theory on solving moral dilemmas. Utilitarian logic aims at maximizing the benefit for the greatest number of people, while deontological theories strive to uphold pervasive moral principles. Jewish thought has always confronted the toughest of human predicaments head-on. As we review part of the Jewish discourse on distributive justice throughout the ages, we will show its relevance to modem discussions on medical resource allocation. As in modem secular ethics, Jewish thought juxtaposes the two aforementioned philosophical viewpoints, and constantly attempts to reconcile them. Extracting from each theory its strengths, the ethical conclusions reached in Jewish religious texts are relevant to issues of resource allocation throughout the ages.</p>","PeriodicalId":54182,"journal":{"name":"MEDICINE AND LAW","volume":"34 1","pages":"251-284"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2015-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"\\\"What shall I do unto this people?\\\" - BIOETHICAL DILEMMAS IN JEWISH THOUGHT ON MEDICAL RESOURCE ALLOCATION: THE COEXISTENCE OF OPPOSING VIEWS.\",\"authors\":\"Annie Reiss,&nbsp;Yigal Shafran,&nbsp;Esther-Lee Marcus\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Life and death decisions have always been part of the medical profession. Modem discussions on resource allocation in health care deal with such critical situations, and seek ethical solutions that will benefit individuals and society as well as conserve scarce resources. Deontological ethics and utilitarianism are opposing ethical views, each with its own theory on solving moral dilemmas. Utilitarian logic aims at maximizing the benefit for the greatest number of people, while deontological theories strive to uphold pervasive moral principles. Jewish thought has always confronted the toughest of human predicaments head-on. As we review part of the Jewish discourse on distributive justice throughout the ages, we will show its relevance to modem discussions on medical resource allocation. As in modem secular ethics, Jewish thought juxtaposes the two aforementioned philosophical viewpoints, and constantly attempts to reconcile them. Extracting from each theory its strengths, the ethical conclusions reached in Jewish religious texts are relevant to issues of resource allocation throughout the ages.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54182,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"MEDICINE AND LAW\",\"volume\":\"34 1\",\"pages\":\"251-284\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"MEDICINE AND LAW\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MEDICINE AND LAW","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

生与死的决定一直是医疗职业的一部分。现代关于卫生保健资源配置的讨论正是针对这种危急情况,寻求既有利于个人和社会,又能节约稀缺资源的伦理解决方案。义务伦理学与功利主义是对立的伦理观点,对于解决道德困境各有自己的理论。功利主义逻辑的目标是使大多数人的利益最大化,而义务论理论则致力于维护普遍存在的道德原则。犹太人的思想总是直面人类最艰难的困境。当我们回顾犹太人关于分配正义的部分论述时,我们将展示其与现代关于医疗资源分配的讨论的相关性。正如在现代世俗伦理,犹太思想并列上述两种哲学观点,并不断试图调和他们。从每个理论的优点中提取出来,犹太宗教文本中得出的伦理结论与各个时代的资源分配问题有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
"What shall I do unto this people?" - BIOETHICAL DILEMMAS IN JEWISH THOUGHT ON MEDICAL RESOURCE ALLOCATION: THE COEXISTENCE OF OPPOSING VIEWS.

Life and death decisions have always been part of the medical profession. Modem discussions on resource allocation in health care deal with such critical situations, and seek ethical solutions that will benefit individuals and society as well as conserve scarce resources. Deontological ethics and utilitarianism are opposing ethical views, each with its own theory on solving moral dilemmas. Utilitarian logic aims at maximizing the benefit for the greatest number of people, while deontological theories strive to uphold pervasive moral principles. Jewish thought has always confronted the toughest of human predicaments head-on. As we review part of the Jewish discourse on distributive justice throughout the ages, we will show its relevance to modem discussions on medical resource allocation. As in modem secular ethics, Jewish thought juxtaposes the two aforementioned philosophical viewpoints, and constantly attempts to reconcile them. Extracting from each theory its strengths, the ethical conclusions reached in Jewish religious texts are relevant to issues of resource allocation throughout the ages.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信